Post: Re: Agraquest potential class action tort
Posted by Dave on 8/10/05
this might have been in the wrong forum from the beginning.
On 8/10/05, Dave wrote:
> In order to combat SBS, wouldn't you need to do research with
> the organisms that cause it? But then deny it.
> AgraQuest is also targeting the control of mold and bacteria
> that cause sick building syndrome. This problem occurs when
> certain types of microorganisms infect buildings and cause
> health problems including headaches, respiratory troubles,
> nosebleeds and memory loss.
> On 8/10/05, Dave wrote:
>> On 8/18/04, dave wrote:
>>> (David, CA.)
>>> Agraquest got me ill from exposure to pathogens and
>>> allergens and set me out the door, layed off. I have been
>>> sick many years.
>>> I filed worker's comp. and now the company slanders me by
>>> saying I was fired. However, I received severance pay of
>>> one month and no dismissal letter. I never expected for
>>> other scientist to do this to me. I thought workplace
>>> safety was of the highest concern.
>>> I need to find an attorney and other former employees to
>>> file a class action lawsuit to prevent this from happening
>>> to other laboratory workers.
>> still sick.
>> What ever happened to the Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA);
>> Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories
>> (BMBL); The Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) and
>> the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act?
>> This stuff Serenade, Bacillus subtilis, was weighed up in the
>> hallway and a bathroom. There are NIOSH exposure limits and
>> this proteolytic enzyme is restricted to a Class 1
>> at minimum.
>> The company's own documents state:
>> SerenadeTM WP was evaluated in a 4-hour, whole
>> body, acute inhalation study in male and female
>> rats.The maximum concentration (MC) which could be
>> was 0.63 milligrams per liter (mg/L), which gave a median
>> aerodynamic particle size of less than 0.4 . No mortality was
>> noted during the study. Some of the clinical abnormalities
>> noted in one or more animals were transient incidences of
>> salvation, breathing abnormalities, decreased activity,
>> gait, apparent hypothermia, hunched posture, decreased
>> defecation, urine stain, decreased food consumption, and dark
>> material around the facial area. Bwt loss was noted for three
>> female rats (one during the 0-7 day interval, and two during
>> the 7-14 day interval). However, this was a slight bwt loss
>> and was not considered to be biologically significant.
>> Here are two 1969 articles about detergent enzymes:
>> Flindt, M. H. L., "Pulmonary Disease Due to Inhalation of
>> Derivatives of Bacillus subtilis Containing Proteolytic
>> Enzyme." The Lancet, (1969), pp. 1177-1181.
>> Pepys, J. et al., "Allergic Reactions of the Lungs to Enzymes
>> of Bacillus subtillis." The Lancet, (1969), pp. 1181-1184.
>> When is somebody going to do something about this illegal
>> It does not make common sense to have a mucus membrane
>> irritant and microbiology/pesticide/insecticide/fungicide
>> research in the same room without telling your employees
>> the hazard.
>> My medical bills add up to over $500,000. I get an IV
>> days. Surely, this is not normal.
subtilisin exposure limits
Posts on this thread, including this one